Assessment-driven selection and adaptation of exercise difficulty in robot-assisted therapy: a pilot study with a hand rehabilitation robot

BackgroundSelecting and maintaining an engaging and challenging training difficulty level in robot-assisted stroke rehabilitation remains an open challenge. Despite the ability of robotic systems to provide objective and accurate measures of function and performance, the selection and adaptation of exercise difficulty levels is typically left to the experience of the supervising therapist.MethodsWe introduce a patient-tailored and adaptive robot-assisted therapy concept to optimally challenge patients from the very first session and throughout therapy progress. The concept is evaluated within a four-week pilot study in six subacute stroke patients performing robot-assisted rehabilitation of hand function. Robotic assessments of both motor and sensory impairments of hand function conducted prior to the therapy are used to adjust exercise parameters and customize difficulty levels. During therapy progression, an automated routine adapts difficulty levels from session to session to maintain patients’ performance around a target level of 70%, to optimally balance motivation and challenge.ResultsRobotic assessments suggested large differences in patients’ sensorimotor abilities that are not captured by clinical assessments. Exercise customization based on these assessments resulted in an average initial exercise performance around 70% (62% ± 20%, mean ± std), which was maintained throughout the course of the therapy (64% ± 21%). Patients showed reduction in both motor and sensory impairments compared to baseline as measured by clinical and robotic assessments. The progress in difficulty levels correlated with improvements in a clinical impairment scale (Fugl-Meyer Assessment) (r s = 0.70), suggesting that the proposed therapy was effective at reducing sensorimotor impairment.ConclusionsInitial robotic assessments combined with progressive difficulty adaptation have the potential to automatically tailor robot-assisted rehabilitation to the individual patient. This results in optimal challenge and engagement of the patient, may facilitate sensorimotor recovery after neurological injury, and has implications for unsupervised robot-assisted therapy in the clinic and home environment.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02096445

[1]  Nicolas Schweighofer,et al.  Performance-Based Adaptive Schedules Enhance Motor Learning , 2008, Journal of motor behavior.

[2]  G.C. Burdea,et al.  Virtual reality-enhanced stroke rehabilitation , 2001, IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering.

[3]  Hermano Igo Krebs,et al.  Rehabilitation Robotics: Performance-Based Progressive Robot-Assisted Therapy , 2003, Auton. Robots.

[4]  James Gordon,et al.  Feasibility of the adaptive and automatic presentation of tasks (ADAPT) system for rehabilitation of upper extremity function post-stroke , 2011, Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation.

[5]  Marcia Kilchenman O'Malley,et al.  Progressive shared control for training in virtual environments , 2009, World Haptics 2009 - Third Joint EuroHaptics conference and Symposium on Haptic Interfaces for Virtual Environment and Teleoperator Systems.

[6]  G. Gescheider Psychophysics: The Fundamentals , 1997 .

[7]  H. Woldag,et al.  Evidence-based physiotherapeutic concepts for improving arm and hand function in stroke patients , 2002, Journal of Neurology.

[8]  M. Munih,et al.  Psychophysiological Measurements in a Biocooperative Feedback Loop for Upper Extremity Rehabilitation , 2011, IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering.

[9]  Robert Riener,et al.  Controlling patient participation during robot-assisted gait training , 2011, Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation.

[10]  P. Verschure,et al.  Virtual reality based rehabilitation speeds up functional recovery of the upper extremities after stroke: a randomized controlled pilot study in the acute phase of stroke using the rehabilitation gaming system. , 2011, Restorative neurology and neuroscience.

[11]  E. C. Huskisson,et al.  Graphic representation of pain , 1976, Pain.

[12]  L. Der-Yeghiaian,et al.  Robot-based hand motor therapy after stroke. , 2007, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[13]  R. Riener,et al.  Validation of a mechanism to balance exercise difficulty in robot-assisted upper-extremity rehabilitation after stroke , 2012, Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation.

[14]  M A Srinivasan,et al.  Manual discrimination of compliance using active pinch grasp: The roles of force and work cues , 1995, Perception & psychophysics.

[15]  Olivier Lambercy,et al.  Neurocognitive Robot-Assisted Therapy of Hand Function , 2014, IEEE Transactions on Haptics.

[16]  M Yekutiel,et al.  A controlled trial of the retraining of the sensory function of the hand in stroke patients. , 1993, Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry.

[17]  D. Reinkensmeyer,et al.  Review of control strategies for robotic movement training after neurologic injury , 2009, Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation.

[18]  D.J. Reinkensmeyer,et al.  Optimizing Compliant, Model-Based Robotic Assistance to Promote Neurorehabilitation , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering.

[19]  M. M. Taylor,et al.  Erratum and Note: PEST: Efficient Estimates on Probability Functions [J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 41, 782–787 (1967)] , 1967 .

[20]  C. Braun,et al.  Motor learning elicited by voluntary drive. , 2003, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[21]  J. Carr Movement Science: Foundations for Physical Therapy in Rehabilitation , 1987 .

[22]  Silvestro Micera,et al.  Tracking Motor Improvement at the Subtask Level During Robot-Aided Neurorehabilitation of Stroke Patients , 2012, Neurorehabilitation and neural repair.

[23]  W. M. Rabinowitz,et al.  Manual discrimination and identification of length by the finger-span method , 1989, Perception & psychophysics.

[24]  David J. Reinkensmeyer,et al.  Slacking by the human motor system: Computational models and implications for robotic orthoses , 2009, 2009 Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society.

[25]  A. Fugl-Meyer,et al.  The post-stroke hemiplegic patient. 1. a method for evaluation of physical performance. , 1975, Scandinavian journal of rehabilitation medicine.

[26]  P. Verschure,et al.  Neurorehabilitation using the virtual reality based Rehabilitation Gaming System: methodology, design, psychometrics, usability and validation , 2010, Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation.

[27]  P. Raghavan,et al.  The nature of hand motor impairment after stroke and its treatment , 2007, Current treatment options in cardiovascular medicine.

[28]  Olivier Lambercy,et al.  Experimental Validation of a Rapid, Adaptive Robotic Assessment of the MCP Joint Angle Difference Threshold , 2014, EuroHaptics.

[29]  Etienne Burdet,et al.  Rehabilitation of grasping and forearm pronation/supination with the Haptic Knob , 2009, 2009 IEEE International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics.

[30]  Qinyin Qiu,et al.  Incorporating Haptic Effects Into Three-Dimensional Virtual Environments to Train the Hemiparetic Upper Extremity , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering.

[31]  BoianRares,et al.  A virtual reality-based exercise system for hand rehabilitation post-stroke , 2005 .

[32]  P. Duncan Synthesis of Intervention Trials To Improve Motor Recovery following Stroke. , 1997, Topics in stroke rehabilitation.

[33]  S. Leonhardt,et al.  A survey on robotic devices for upper limb rehabilitation , 2014, Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation.

[34]  Andrea Federspiel,et al.  Lesions to Primary Sensory and Posterior Parietal Cortices Impair Recovery from Hand Paresis after Stroke , 2012, PloS one.

[35]  R. Colombo,et al.  Taking a Lesson From Patients' Recovery Strategies to Optimize Training During Robot-Aided Rehabilitation , 2012, IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering.

[36]  Olivier Lambercy,et al.  Design and characterization of the ReHapticKnob, a robot for assessment and therapy of hand function , 2011, 2011 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems.

[37]  Stefania Serafin,et al.  CARess, a Gentle Touch Informs the Driver , 2014, EuroHaptics.

[38]  W. Rymer,et al.  Adaptive assistance for guided force training in chronic stroke , 2004, The 26th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society.

[39]  J. Krakauer,et al.  Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair Inter-individual Variability in the Capacity for Motor Recovery after Ischemic Stroke Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair Additional Services and Information for Inter-individual Variability in the Capacity for Motor Recovery after Ischemic Stroke , 2022 .

[40]  P. Langhorne,et al.  Motor recovery after stroke: a systematic review , 2009, The Lancet Neurology.

[41]  N. Hogan,et al.  Motions or muscles? Some behavioral factors underlying robotic assistance of motor recovery. , 2006, Journal of rehabilitation research and development.

[42]  Y. Youm,et al.  Biomechanical analyses of forearm pronation-supination and elbow flexion-extension. , 1979, Journal of biomechanics.

[43]  Paolo Bonato,et al.  Patient specific ankle-foot orthoses using rapid prototyping , 2011, Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation.

[44]  A. Mihailidis,et al.  The development of an adaptive upper-limb stroke rehabilitation robotic system , 2011, Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation.

[45]  S. K. Wee,et al.  Effects of a robot-assisted training of grasp and pronation/supination in chronic stroke: a pilot study , 2011, Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation.

[46]  M. M. Taylor,et al.  PEST: Efficient Estimates on Probability Functions , 1967 .